ICE fining immigration attorney for alleged false asylum claims, a first for the agency

(NEW YORK) — The results of House, governor and mayoral primary elections in six states on Tuesday night show some promising signs for incumbents and the Democratic establishment and the potential limits of an endorsement from President Donald Trump.

They also show what a key toss-up race jolted by a congressman’s absence will look like in the November midterms.

Here are some takeaways from the June 2 primaries.

Karen Bass is first LA mayor in more than 20 years to face runoff

In Los Angeles’ closely watched nonpartisan mayoral primary race, embattled incumbent Mayor Karen Bass has reason for enthusiasm after months of uncertainty, while reality star Spencer Pratt still has to play the waiting game, although he appears to have put up a strong showing. ABC News projected on Tuesday that Bass will advance to a runoff in November, meaning she will have a shot to keep her seat.

Bass, the first woman and second African American elected to lead the city, is the first Los Angeles mayor to face a runoff in more than two decades.

Bass dedicated her reelection campaign to emphasizing her past experience and achievements in the role, but faced scrutiny over her record and battled criticism for her handling of last year’s Los Angeles wildfires. Bass, who was away from the city on a planned diplomatic trip to Ghana when the Palisades Fire first erupted, has pushed back on criticism over her management of the fire, saying earlier this year that her focus “is on the lives and on the homes.”

Criticism of Bass gave an opening to Spencer Pratt, the former star of “The Hills,” who ran a campaign focused on calling out Bass’ handling of the fires and saying that he’d fix a city he felt had become broken.

It’s still unclear if Pratt will advance to the next round with Bass, or whether progressive city councilmember Nithya Raman will end up in the runoff. As of Wednesday morning, Pratt is in second place and leads Raman by around 8 percentage points, but there is still around an estimated 40% of the vote left to be counted.

Pratt’s current second-place position, which could shift, might be read by some as a limit on the allure of celebrity candidates. However, it could also be seen as a sign of the strength of Pratt running a campaign with a clear message and going beyond relying just on name recognition.

In the state’s marquee race for governor, meanwhile, it’s still too early to tell which candidates will advance in the top-two primary — with many mail ballots still to be counted.

As of Wednesday morning, Trump-endorsed Republican Steve Hilton and former Health Secretary Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, have the most votes, with billionaire businessman Tom Steyer — a Democratic candidate who spent tens of millions in the race — running behind them.

In Iowa, a loss for Trump-supported candidate in gubernatorial primary and potential win for the Democratic establishment

Trump’s key endorsements during the 2026 election cycle have usually resulted in wins for his preferred candidates, including in Kentucky’s recent 4th Congressional District primaries where a Trump-backed challenger unseated the maverick GOP Rep. Thomas Massie.

But one major Trump-backed candidate in Iowa conceded in his primary.

Republican Rep. Randy Feenstra, who currently represents Iowa’s 4th Congressional District and was mounting a statewide bid for governor, conceded late Tuesday to GOP opponent and “Make America Healthy Again” movement supporter, Zach Lahn, in the gubernatorial primary in Iowa.

As of Wednesday morning, he trailed Lahn by around 1 percentage point.

Lahn will face Iowa state auditor Rob Sand, who was unopposed in the Democratic primary, in November. Democrats have feted Sand as a candidate who can flip the governorship by appealing to voters across the aisle, although he’ll still face an uphill battle in a state that voted for Trump by 13 points in 2024.

Meanwhile, Iowa state Rep. Josh Turek’s projected win by over 20 percentage points in the Iowa Democratic primary for Senate could be seen as a win for establishment Democrats, in a year when progressive challengers have been making waves in primaries across the country and occasionally unseating incumbents.

Turek himself is not an average politician. He has a unique background, as a four-time Paralympian born with spina bifida after his father was exposed to Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam. But he was also, to an extent, seen as the Democratic establishment’s choice, given that he received support from Democratic groups that are aligned with Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who did not formally endorse Turek, and took on positions that tacked to the center.

Turek will face Trump-backed Rep. Ashley Hinson, the projected winner of the Republican primary, in what is set to become one of the most closely watched Senate races of 2026. The seat is opening up as Republican incumbent Sen. Joni Ernst is retiring.

Key New Jersey matchup gets set amid Kean’s absence

ABC News has projected that Rebecca Bennett, a former Navy helicopter pilot, will be the Democratic nominee for Congress in New Jersey’s 7th Congressional District, in what is set to be a closely watched matchup between incumbent GOP Rep. Tom Kean and Bennett this November — especially given Kean’s unusual absence from Congress for months. Trump has backed Kean regardless of his absence.

New Jersey’s 7th District was already a top target for Democrats this year even before Kean’s disappearance occurred. The district is rated as a toss up-by the Cook Political Report, and Trump just barely carried it in 2024.

Kean flipped the seat in 2022 for Republicans, just a few years after Democrat Tom Malinowski flipped the seat when he won it in 2018. But Kean has been absent from Congress for months, and has not voted since March 5. For weeks, Kean’s office has defended the congressman’s hiatus — telling reporters that he is addressing an unspecific medical issue.

Kean said in a statement on Tuesday afternoon, “I am optimistic about the road ahead, and ready to earn the support of voters in every corner of this district.” A spokesperson for Kean also told ABC News that the congressman voted by mail last week.

ABC News’ Emily Chang, Clarissa Gonzalez, Juhi Doshi, Gaby Vinick, Lauren Peller, John Parkinson and Jay O’Brien contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump celebrated the Senate’s passage of the Protect College Sports Act, saying that the legislation will “save college sports” and is a “really big deal.”

“This is a really big deal. It will not only save college sports, it will save the colleges themselves,” Trump wrote in a Monday night social media post.

Trump has long been an advocate for this legislation and said in August that he would sign the bill “immediately” if it came across his desk — urging both the House and Senate to advance it.

On Monday night, the Senate passed the act with a vote of 77-22, bringing a massive restructuring of college athletics one step closer.

The legislation establishes a federal framework for college athletics to create one set system over the current patchwork of differing state rules. It creates one rulebook on how athletes can earn money from their name, image and likeness (NIL) and puts a cap on the amount of money schools can directly share with their athletes. 

But it’s not just about money. The bill also deals with transfers, eligibility and media rights. Athletes can transfer to another school one time without losing a year of eligibility and student-athletes are given five years of eligibility with exceptions for certain circumstances such as a serious injury. The legislation also gives colleges the ability to negotiate broadcasting agreements collectively to give them more control over how their games are marketed and distributed. 

Supporters of the bill say that it will add much-needed stability to the world of college athletics that has rapidly changed in recent years due to increasing NIL deals and frequent transfers. Senators — including Sen. Ted Cruz — argue that creating one national set of rules will reduce uncertainty and establish clear guidelines for compensation, eligibility and media rights.

“This bill puts an end to the chaos plaguing college athletics. It protects NIL opportunities because student athletes deserve the opportunity to benefit from their talent, without being taken advantage of by unscrupulous agents and backdoor deals, it creates clear, enforceable rules for eligibility and transfers. It protects our traditions and rivalries,” Cruz said on the Senate floor ahead of Monday’s vote.

While the bill received bipartisan support in the Senate on Monday, there were still concerns from many senators, largely around the amount of leverage the bill gives to the NCAA. The NCAA will now be in charge of overseeing school compliance on certain portions of the bill while also being granted immunity from federal antitrust lawsuits when enforcing its rules.

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, one of the bill’s opponents, argued that the legislation could give the NCAA greater legal protection and authority without giving athletes an equivalent role in negotiating the rules that govern them. 

“You don’t need a bill of this sweeping scope to address what are a set of minor but important practices in college athletics that have gotten out of control. We could have either passed a very narrow bill here to address the agent issue and the transfer issue, or we could have done what happens in most industries, which is just say to the NCAA and to the colleges, tough luck. Congress isn’t going to come in here and micromanage your relationship with the athletes. If you want to work something out, sit down and talk to the athletes about it,” Murphy said.

On Monday night, the NCAA thanked the senators who supported the legislation and looked ahead to the next hurdle: House passage.

“The NCAA thanks the many senators who sponsored this bill — including Senators Cruz, Cantwell, Schmitt and Coons — as well as the many other senators who voted for the bill, for their bipartisan effort to protect this uniquely American tradition of college sports in the decades to come,” the NCAA wrote in a social media post. “Now the bill moves to the U.S. House of Representatives and there is much work left to do to ensure student-athlete benefits are codified into federal law and future generations of young people can access those benefits and use college sports as the launching point for their careers.”

The bipartisan piece of legislation still faces obstacles in the House.

The Congressional Black Caucus has come out against the bill because they believe it doesn’t include strong enough protections and economic opportunities for Black athletes. Additionally, some conservative House members have expressed criticism for similar legislation, arguing the government is trying to have too much oversight over college sports.

The House remains out of session for their midterm recess and it is unlikely that they will be called back to Washington early to consider the legislation. 

So while the legislation is now in the red zone, it’s going to take more than a “tush push” to get it into the end zone and onto the president’s desk.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

The execution of Nidal Hasan, the former Army major who killed 13 people and wounded 32 others in a 2009 shooting at Fort Hood, Texas, will be live-streamed, a Pentagon official told ABC News on Thursday.

Hasan, who described the attack as an act of jihad, is scheduled to executed by firing squad on Dec. 3 at the same base where he committed the attack.

Public executions were once common in the U.S., but states began restricting and abolishing the practice in the mid 19th and early 20th centuries. The last widely recognized public execution was carried out in Kentucky in 1936.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a media interview that Fort Hood was chosen because that was where Hasan carried out the attack and that the 1 p.m. execution time was selected to roughly coincide with when the shooting began.

President Donald Trump ordered the Army to execute Hasan, which would be its first execution since 1961, and to do so by firing squad. The military has not used that method since 1945 and no longer has a modern procedure for administering it.

The choice of a firing squad forced the Army to abandon months of planning built around a very different kind of execution. Internal documents reviewed by ABC News show that officials had been preparing to use lethal injection if Trump authorized the execution of one of the four prisoners on the service’s death row.

Trump’s approval last Friday came only days after the botched lethal-injection execution of Christa Pike in Tennessee, who survived. Pike had been sentenced to death for her role in a 1995 murder.

John Galligan, a retired Army colonel and former military judge at Fort Hood, has represented Hasan for years as a civilian attorney and said he spoke with him Wednesday.

Hasan represented himself during his court-martial but Galligan remained involved in his legal counsel. He told ABC News that Hasan was notified late at night that Trump had approved the execution and that no defense attorney was present when he received the notice.

Last year, the Supreme Court declined to review Hasan’s court-martial conviction. However, Hasan could still seek habeas corpus relief in federal court, potentially delaying the execution.

Following his conversation yesterday with Hasan, Galligan said filing for a habeas petition is “a distinct possibility,” but that they have not yet made a final decision on how they will proceed.

Galligan criticized the Army for scheduling the execution close to the earliest date allowed under its regulations saying officials are, “pushing to get this done at earliest time possible.”

He was especially critical of the decision to carry out the execution at Fort Hood, citing medical concerns for how Hasan, who is paralyzed and in a wheelchair as a result of military officers who subdued him during the shooting, will be transported to the facility. Hasan is currently imprisoned at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Army rules require an execution to be scheduled between 60 and 150 days after presidential approval, placing Hasan’s execution almost as early as the rules permit.

Galligan said that Hasan’s demeanor was calm after receiving the news of Trump’s approval of his execution Monday, but that he was surprised when Galligan told him that the execution would take place at Fort Hood.

“I’m surprised and shocked that they want to bring him back to Fort Hood. I think it’s more of a public spectacle, closely akin to almost, I see it more as political theater,” Galligan said, adding that making the execution public is, “not great for the confidence in our system of justice.”

 

Hegseth’s push for Hasan’s execution

 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, meanwhile, has pushed for Hasan’s execution for much of his tenure, according to two U.S. officials, but his focus on the case predates his time at the Pentagon.

In 2015, during an appearance on Fox News making the case that troops should be permitted to carry weapons on military bases, Hegseth invoked the Fort Hood shooting. “We are at war. Islamics are at war with us,” he said.

A decade later, in his role as Pentagon chief, Hegseth made his position on Hasan more explicit. “I am 100% committed to ensuring the death penalty is carried out for Nidal Hasan,” he told The Hill in September last year. “The victims and survivors deserve justice without delays.”

Internal documents reviewed by ABC News show that, since at least February, Army officials were developing a plan dubbed “Operation Resolute Justice.”

That plan envisioned lethal injection if the president authorized an execution in Terre Haute, Indiana, at the same prison complex where a series of federal executions happened during Trump’s first term.

From the mid-1980s until 2023, lethal injection was the default method of Army executions, until their rules were rewritten to give the Army secretary broad authority as to execution methods.

A military court can impose a death sentence, but carrying it out requires a separate chain of civilian approval. The service secretary, in this case acting Army Secretary Adam Telle, who has been in the job for about a month, must first sign off. The decision then goes to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth before ultimately reaching the president, who has the final authority to approve the execution.

 

How the Army has conducted firing squad executions

 

Among the unanswered questions are how the Army will select the soldiers who would serve as executioners and how it will train them for a task the military has not carried out in more than a half-century.

The Army’s most detailed procedures for carrying out an execution by firing squad date to 1959 and have not been updated since. The Army is quickly developing a new procedure on conducting firing squad executions, according to a service official.

But under those old execution rules, a condemned prisoner would be given consistent access to a chaplain, and, when practical, reasonable final requests, according to documentation reviewed by ABC News.

The execution itself called for eight riflemen led by a senior enlisted soldier armed with a pistol. The firing squad would take up position in a straight line, 15 paces from the prisoner, whose wrists and ankles would be restrained. A chaplain could remain with the prisoner up until the final moments before the shooting is ordered.

Between one and three of the eight rifles would be loaded with blanks, and the shooters would select their weapons at random. The prisoner would be dressed in a military uniform stripped of awards, insignia and other markings.

After being given an opportunity to make a final statement, the prisoner would be hooded and a medical officer would place a four-inch target over the heart. The chaplain and medical officer would then move away.

The firing squad would be ordered to aim and fire simultaneously. If the prisoner survived, the rules called for the senior enlisted leader of the firing squad to approach with their pistol, aim above the prisoner’s ear and fire 12 inches from the head.

It is unclear how closely the Army will adhere to those decades-old procedures in Hasan’s case, or how they might be adapted for a prisoner who is paralyzed and uses a wheelchair.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.